Comparison of the Fatigue Performance of Commercially Produced Nitinol Samples versus Sputter-Deposited Nitinol

  • Gerd Siekmeyer
  • Andreas Schüßler
  • Rodrigo Lima de Miranda
  • Eckhard Quandt
Article

Abstract

Self-expanding vascular implants are typically manufactured from Nitinol tubing, using laser cutting, shape setting, and electropolishing processes. The mechanical and fatigue behavior of those devices are affected by the raw material and its processing such as the melting process and subsequent warm and cold forming processes. Current trends focus on the use of raw material with fewer inclusions to improve the fatigue performance. Further device miniaturization and higher fatigue life requirements will drive the need toward smaller inclusions and new manufacturing methods. As published previously, the high-cycle fatigue region of medical devices from standard processed Nitinol is usually about 0.4-0.5% half-alternating strain. However, these results highly depend on the ingot and semi-finished materials, the applied manufacturing processes, the final dimensions of test samples, and applied test methods. Fabrication by sputter deposition is favorable, because it allows the manufacturing of micro-patterned Nitinol thin-film devices without small burrs, heat-affected zones, microcracks, or any contamination with carbides, as well as the fabrication of complex components e.g., 3D geometries. Today, however, there is limited data available on the fatigue behavior for real stent devices based on such sputter-deposited Nitinol. A detailed study (e.g., using metallographic methods, corrosion, tensile, and fatigue testing) was conducted for the first time in order to characterize the micro-patterned Nitinol thin-film material.

Keywords

fatigue performance nitinol tubing vascular implants 

References

  1. 1.
    T.W. Duerig and A.R. Pelton, Ti-Ni Shape Memory Alloys, Material Properties Handbook Titanium Alloys, R. Boyer, G. Welsch, and E.W. Collings, Ed., ASM International, Materials Park, OH, 1994, p 1035–1048 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Toro, F. Zhou, et.al. Characterization of Non-Metallic Inclusions in Superelastic NiTi Tubes, SMST Proceedings SMST2008, JMEPEG, vol. 18, 2009, p 448–458Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A.R. Pelton et al., Nitinol Fatigue: A Review of Microstructures and Mechanisms, SMST Proceedings SMST2010, JMEPEG, vol. 20, 2011, p 613–617Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    N. Morgan, A. Wick, et al., Carbon and Oxygen Levels in Nitinol Alloys and the Implications for Medical Device Manufacture and Durability, Proceedings of the International Conference on SMST, May 7-11, 2006, p 821–828Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.E. Schaffer, Structure-Property Relationships in Conventional and Nanocrystalline NiTi Intermetallic Alloy Wire, JMEPEG, 2009, 18, p 582–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    F. Sczerzenie, P. Graeme et al., Comparison of Inclusions in Cold Drawn Wire And Precursor Hot-Rolled Rod Coil in VIM-VAR Nickel-Titanium Alloy, JMEPEG, 2011, 20, p 752–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    A.R. Pelton, V. Schroeder et al., Fatigue and Durability of Nitinol Stents, J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater., 2008, 1, p 153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    S.W. Robertson, A.R. Pelton et al., Mechanical Fatigue and Fracture of Nitinol, Int. Mater. Rev., 2012, 57(1), p 1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Lima de Miranda, C. Zamponi, and E. Quandt, Micropatterned Freestanding Superelastic TiNi Films, Adv. Eng. Mater., 2013, 15(1-2), p 66–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. O’Brien, W.M. Caroll et al., Passivation of Nitinol Wire for Vascular Implants—A Demonstration of the Benefits, Biomaterials, 2992, 23, p 1739–1748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Venugipalan and C. Trepanier, Corrosion of Nitinol, Proceedings of the International Conference on SMST-2000, S. Russel and A. Pelton, Eds., 2000, Springer, New York, p 261–270Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    K.N. Melton and O. Mercier, Fatigue of NiTi Thermoelastic Martensites, Acta Metall., 1979, 27(1), p 137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Adler, P.H., Allen, J., et al., Martensite Transformations and Fatigue Behavior of Nitinol, J. ASTM Int., 2007, 4(7), DOI: 10.1520/JAI100645
  14. 14.
    A. Mehta, X.-Y. Gong et al., Understanding the Deformation and Fracture of Nitinol Endovascular Stents Using In Situ Synchrotron x-ray Microdiffraction, Adv. Mater., 2007, 19, p 1183–1186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Maletta, Sgambittera et al., Fatigue of Pseudoelastic NiTi Within Stress-Induced Transformation Regime: A Modified Coffin-Manson Approach, Smart Mater. Struct., 2012, 21(112001), p 1–7Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Y. Onuma and P. Serruys, Bioresorbable Scaffold—The Advent of a New Era in Percutaneous Coronary and Peripheral Revascularization?, Circulation, 2011, 123, p 779–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerd Siekmeyer
    • 1
  • Andreas Schüßler
    • 1
  • Rodrigo Lima de Miranda
    • 2
    • 3
  • Eckhard Quandt
    • 3
  1. 1.ADMEDES Schuessler GmbHPforzheimGermany
  2. 2.Acquandas GmbHKielGermany
  3. 3.Institute for Material ScienceUniversity of KielKielGermany

Personalised recommendations